Skip to main content
Glama

Local MCP

by com.local-mcp
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

List Calendar Names

list_calendar_names
Read-only

Lists the calendars in the Mac's Calendar app (Calendar.app, local/iCloud). For Microsoft 365 calendars use m365_list_events / m365_create_event instead (listed once a Microsoft 365 account is connected). Each entry's permissions carries only the permissions this service has (read, send, write; a key that is missing does not apply). true: allowed in the account's boxes (LMCP's icon → My apps → open the app's row → the account's Read · Send · Write) and the item accepts it. false: turned off there, or the item is read-only (read_only: true).

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
countNo
calendarsNo

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed2 schema fields changed
    • addedOutput schema / properties / calendars / items / properties / permissions
      Added value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "read": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "send": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    },
+    "write": {
+      "type": "boolean"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}
    • addedOutput schema / properties / calendars / items / properties / read_only
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "true: the system reports this item as not modifiable. Absent when it cannot tell.",
+  "type": "boolean"
+}
  2. Changed1 schema field changed
    • addedOutput schema / properties / calendars / items / properties / source
      Added value: +{
+  "description": "Owning account (iCloud, Exchange, an email address, On My Mac). Two calendars can share a title across accounts — use this (or id) to disambiguate.",
+  "type": "string"
+}
  3. First observed

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint/openWorldHint=false, but the description adds non-obvious semantics about the `permissions` field, including that a missing key means the permission does not apply and that `read_only: true` forces false. That is real information an agent cannot infer from the annotations; it is docked only for the convoluted UI-navigation parenthetical that obscures the rule.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loaded with purpose, then the alternative, then field semantics — a sensible ordering. The permissions paragraph is dense and parenthetical-heavy ('LMCP's icon → My apps → open the app's row → the account's Read · Send · Write'), which costs some clarity.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists, so return-value documentation is not required, yet the description still covers the one nuanced field (`permissions`) that matters for interpreting results. Combined with the sibling routing, an agent has everything needed to call and read this correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; the baseline of 4 applies. The text rightly spends its budget on response-field semantics instead of inventing parameter guidance.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Opens with a specific verb+resource and scope: 'Lists the calendars in the Mac's Calendar app (Calendar.app, local/iCloud).' That scope qualifier immediately separates it from the Microsoft 365 calendar family in the sibling list.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly routes the agent away: 'For Microsoft 365 calendars use m365_list_events / m365_create_event instead', with the condition (M365 account connected) stated. Both the when and the when-not are present.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All Local MCP toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources